[Nancy2]

On Jan 19, 5:41*pm, ImStillMags > wrote:
> On Jan 19, 2:10*pm, Nancy2 > wrote:
>
> > > So, Hi. * *I'm hoping this board will become a favorite and a place
> > > where I can have conversations with
> > > like minded foodies.
>
> > > -Mags
>
> > It isn't a board, it's a Usenet newsgroup. *Other than that, it's what
> > you see.
>
> > N.
>
> I access this 'group' through Google message boards.....it looks like
> every other Google board to me *;-)

Are you sure you don't get it through "Google Groups?" That's where I
access it.

N.

[sf[_9_]]

On Wed, 20 Jan 2010 13:53:41 -0500, blake murphy
> wrote:

>well, all i can say is that you're swimming against the tide, here.

More like spitting in the wind. It's a thankless job, but somebody
has to do it.

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

[sf[_9_]]

On Wed, 20 Jan 2010 13:30:18 -0600, heyjoe >
wrote:

>On Wed, 20 Jan 2010 11:11:35 -0800, sf wrote:
>
>> I've used Agent from v1 and don't remember that button. Of course, I
>> used the free agent up to this version.
>
>For your version of Agent
>group > default properties > posting messages >
>x Prevent usenet messages from being archived (X-No-Archive)
>x Observe X-No-Archive requests from original message in fillowups

Ah. Ok, it's not a button.
>
>Haven't used anything newer than version 2, so am not sure if those options
>are still avaialble or where they be hiding.

Most likely it's there along with a lot more bells and whistles. I

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

[Michel Boucher[_3_]]

sf > wrote in news:l2oel55b8onjvsu98luucvq53l8hrbb1l4@
4ax.com:

>>well, all i can say is that you're swimming against the tide, here.
>
> More like spitting in the wind. It's a thankless job, but somebody
> has to do it.

Why not save yourself the aggro. No one has to do it, especially as it
promotes the use of questionable justifications :-)

Unlax, already.

--

I have nothing against God.
It's his fan club I can't stand.

spotted on a poster

[sf[_9_]]

On Wed, 20 Jan 2010 14:13:25 -0600, Stu > wrote:

>
>Was using v1.93, but am now using v5.2, seems v9 is out already. I
>won't be upgrading as this does all I want.

v9? Not a snowballs chance in h*ll. They're still working on v6x.

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

[Becca]

ChattyCathy wrote:
>> Crisco shortening
>> Margarine
>> Miracle Whip
>> Top Ramen
>> Velveeta Cheese
>> Canned Parmesan Cheese
>> Dream Whip
>> Boxed cake mix
>> Cool Whip
>> Chili recipes that include beans (that one is mine, sorry :-( )
>>
>> Welcome to the group!
>>
>
> You forgot cilantro and peeling boiled eggs...
>

Hey, we forgot the Neiman-Marcus cookie recipe. lol


Becca

[George Shirley]

Becca wrote:
> ChattyCathy wrote:
>>> Crisco shortening
>>> Margarine
>>> Miracle Whip
>>> Top Ramen
>>> Velveeta Cheese
>>> Canned Parmesan Cheese
>>> Dream Whip
>>> Boxed cake mix
>>> Cool Whip
>>> Chili recipes that include beans (that one is mine, sorry :-( )
>>>
>>> Welcome to the group!
>>>
>>
>> You forgot cilantro and peeling boiled eggs...
>>
>
> Hey, we forgot the Neiman-Marcus cookie recipe. lol
>
>
> Becca

That one is discounted to a mere US$150.00 this week only. Please send
either a postal money order or an international money order. No checks
please.

[Lou decruss]

On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 21:11:42 -0600, "Gregory Morrow"
> wrote:

>Remember, Bob, when some wag "spilled the beans" on PeterBreath's food
>"pictures" - that they were actually lifted from _Australian Woman_
>magazine...!!!???
>
>Lol...

Is that the mag Abby Winters shoots for?

Lou

[Dan Abel]

In article
>,
ImStillMags > wrote:

> >
> > > -Mags
> >
> > Sorry to chime in so late. *I've been busy. *Welcome. *:-)

> Thanks Jean, I think I'm understanding the lay of the land here ;-)

Don't get too complacent. I believe the Cabal (TINC) is going to change
everything early on Monday.

:-)

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

[Dan Abel]

In article >,
blake murphy > wrote:

> On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 10:42:29 -0800, sf wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 12:56:10 -0500, blake murphy
> > > wrote:

> >>in any case, people could edit better (including taking care with
> >>attributions), but it's not a major source of irritation for me.
> >
> > It's a major problem for me. Obviously they have no idea who said
> > what. If that's the case, then just cut out everything except what
> > you're responding to.
>
> well, all i can say is that you're swimming against the tide, here.

I'm glad you understood what was being posted. I sure didn't. It
almost sounded like sf was saying that people should trim their posts so
that their replies make sense.

"Sense" sounds like a good thing to me.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

[Default User]

Dan Abel wrote:

> In article >,
> blake murphy > wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 10:42:29 -0800, sf wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 12:56:10 -0500, blake murphy
> > > > wrote:
>
> > > > in any case, people could edit better (including taking care
> > > > with attributions), but it's not a major source of irritation
> > > > for me.
> > >
> > > It's a major problem for me. Obviously they have no idea who said
> > > what. If that's the case, then just cut out everything except
> > > what you're responding to.
> >
> > well, all i can say is that you're swimming against the tide, here.
>
> I'm glad you understood what was being posted. I sure didn't. It
> almost sounded like sf was saying that people should trim their posts
> so that their replies make sense.

No, she was saying that people who bottom-post frequently fail to trim,
making their posts hard to follow, so everyone should top-post instead.



Brian

--
Day 352 of the "no grouchy usenet posts" project

[sf[_9_]]

On 20 Jan 2010 23:48:28 GMT, "Default User" >
wrote:

>No, she was saying that people who bottom-post frequently fail to trim,
>making their posts hard to follow, so everyone should top-post instead.
>

Yep. That's what I said. Top posting keeps proper attributions with
the text. No muss, no fuss, no bother.

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

[TammyM[_1_]]

Christine Dabney wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 06:33:35 -0800, TammyM > wrote:
>
>
>> I think you may have preceded me then, Christine. I first found rfc in
>> December, 1994. I remember because it was about the same time I bought
>> my house. But it was awhile before I actually posted. Shy, I reckon :-)
>>
>> TammyM
>
> You sure, Tammy?
> I know I saw you posting before I even dared to make a post in such
> illustrious company. I was in awe of the folks posting then. I was
> excited that someone from Sacramento was posting...
>
> I may have joined mid year or thereabouts, but I didn't post til later
> in the year. Again, I felt like such an ignoramus among the folks
> that were jabbering back and forth here. I finally screwed up the
> nerve to post. I just looked this morning, and found one of my
> earliest posts in like November '94.
>
> It was a heady time, with Susan, and Anne Bourget and Joel Erhlich,
> and the Dans, and Andy, and a ton of other folks posting frequently.

I'm positive. I had just signed on my house - hard to forget that!

TammyM

[Michel Boucher[_3_]]

sf > wrote in news:gi8fl55dn71f7ap4986ggfv98ihvhjidu3@
4ax.com:

> Top posting keeps proper attributions with
> the text. No muss, no fuss, no bother.

However, judicious editing and interlarding (ob food) comments shows more
respect for your reader. Yes, it takes time but if you can't devote time
to the pursuit of proper electronic epistolary style, why even bother?

Top posting is Microsoft's lazy-ass reply process which seems to work in an
office setting where you may need all previous comments as a short term
archive, but not on Usenet where this is a conversation.

If you want to be a Microsoft toadie, why don't you just say so :-)

Of course, I'm old school...trim, edit, comment, and so on.

--

I have nothing against God.
It's his fan club I can't stand.

spotted on a poster

[Gregory Morrow[_400_]]

Lou Decruss wrote:

> On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 21:11:42 -0600, "Gregory Morrow"
> > wrote:
>
>> Remember, Bob, when some wag "spilled the beans" on PeterBreath's
>> food "pictures" - that they were actually lifted from _Australian
>> Woman_ magazine...!!!???
>>
>> Lol...
>
> Is that the mag Abby Winters shoots for?


I dunno...

--
Best
Greg

[Goomba[_2_]]

TammyM wrote:
> Christine Dabney wrote:

>> It was a heady time, with Susan, and Anne Bourget and Joel Erhlich,
>> and the Dans, and Andy, and a ton of other folks posting frequently.
>
> I'm positive. I had just signed on my house - hard to forget that!
>
> TammyM

Any memory of the first meal you made there?

My father used to think one needed to fry up some peppers, onions and
(Italian) sausages to make a house "smell" like home.

[sf[_9_]]

On Wed, 20 Jan 2010 20:15:29 -0600, Michel Boucher
> wrote:

>
>If you want to be a Microsoft toadie, why don't you just say so :-)
>
I am. I love Windows. I knelt down and kissed Bills feet when I
didn't have to use DOS and Word Perfect.

>Of course, I'm old school...trim, edit, comment, and so on.

Rock on!

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

[--Bryan]

On Jan 19, 7:52*pm, Christine Dabney > wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 06:33:35 -0800, TammyM > wrote:
> >I think you may have preceded me then, Christine. *I first found rfc in
> >December, 1994. *I remember because it was about the same time I bought
> >my house. *But it was awhile before I actually posted. *Shy, I reckon :-)
>
> >TammyM
>
> You sure, Tammy?
> I know I saw you posting before I even dared to make a post in such
> illustrious company. *I was in awe of the folks posting then. *I was
> excited that someone from Sacramento was posting...
>
> I may have joined mid year or thereabouts, but I didn't post til later
> in the year. * Again, I felt like such an ignoramus among the folks
> that were jabbering back and forth here. *I finally screwed up the
> nerve to post. I just looked this morning, and found one of my
> earliest posts in like November '94.
>
> It was a heady time, with Susan, and Anne Bourget and Joel Erhlich,
> and the Dans, and Andy, and a ton of other folks posting frequently.

You mean many tons. I mean, how many RFCers does it take to make a
ton?
>
> Christine

--Bryan

[Michel Boucher[_3_]]

sf > wrote in news:3uifl5lu4tc96p945c9hhvofj2hdobbb5g@
4ax.com:

> I love Windows. I knelt down and kissed Bills feet when I
> didn't have to use DOS and Word Perfect.

You take that back. DOS 5.0 was the perfect operating system.

--

I have nothing against God.
It's his fan club I can't stand.

spotted on a poster

[Krypsis]

Michel Boucher wrote:
> sf > wrote in news:3uifl5lu4tc96p945c9hhvofj2hdobbb5g@
> 4ax.com:
>
>> I love Windows. I knelt down and kissed Bills feet when I
>> didn't have to use DOS and Word Perfect.
>
> You take that back. DOS 5.0 was the perfect operating system.
>
DOS 5.0 was a "Disk Operating System", not an "Operating System" as that
would assume control over a bit more than disk drives and various bits
of hardware. There wasn't even a hint of security in DOS (input any
version), a feature vital in a multiuser/multitasking environment. Come
to think of it, DOS beasts couldn't multitask either. Our Cromix
machines would run rings around the early PC's and we had them in the
late 70's and early 80's.

Krypsis

[Michel Boucher[_3_]]

Krypsis > wrote in news:4b58562f$0$5422$afc38c87
@news.optusnet.com.au:

> There wasn't even a hint of security in DOS (input any
> version), a feature vital in a multiuser/multitasking environment.

It was however the only properly documented one that Microsoft ever put
out. Everything you needed to know to make it work was in the manual.

--

I have nothing against God.
It's his fan club I can't stand.

spotted on a poster

[blake murphy[_2_]]

On Wed, 20 Jan 2010 19:27:52 +0200, ChattyCathy wrote:

> Becca wrote:
>
>> ImStillMags wrote:
>>> I'll make like a duck........it rolls right off. Thanks.
>>>
>>
>> That will help if you mention any of these:
>>
>> Crisco shortening
>> Margarine
>> Miracle Whip
>> Top Ramen
>> Velveeta Cheese
>> Canned Parmesan Cheese
>> Dream Whip
>> Boxed cake mix
>> Cool Whip
>> Chili recipes that include beans (that one is mine, sorry :-( )
>>
>> Welcome to the group!
>
> You forgot cilantro and peeling boiled eggs...

and people keep asking about recipes from some place called 'europe'...

your pal,
blake

[blake murphy[_2_]]

On Wed, 20 Jan 2010 15:05:37 -0600, George Shirley wrote:

> Becca wrote:
>> ChattyCathy wrote:
>>>> Crisco shortening
>>>> Margarine
>>>> Miracle Whip
>>>> Top Ramen
>>>> Velveeta Cheese
>>>> Canned Parmesan Cheese
>>>> Dream Whip
>>>> Boxed cake mix
>>>> Cool Whip
>>>> Chili recipes that include beans (that one is mine, sorry :-( )
>>>>
>>>> Welcome to the group!
>>>>
>>>
>>> You forgot cilantro and peeling boiled eggs...
>>>
>>
>> Hey, we forgot the Neiman-Marcus cookie recipe. lol
>>
>> Becca
>
> That one is discounted to a mere US$150.00 this week only. Please send
> either a postal money order or an international money order. No checks
> please.

shee-it, i got my recipe from wal-mart for $25.

your pal,
blake

[blake murphy[_2_]]

On Wed, 20 Jan 2010 11:01:14 -0800, sf wrote:

> On Wed, 20 Jan 2010 10:48:49 -0600, heyjoe >
> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 17:27:28 -0800, sf wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 18:28:58 -0600, heyjoe >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>for some insight into why
>>>>you're not reaching as many folks in rec.food.cooking as you could
>>>
>>> Which isn't necessarily a bad thing either. I'd call it a reverse
>>> kill file, a gift from Google.
>>
>>Ahh, so whenever the old stuck-in-the-mud RFC'ers are hassling me about new
>>thoughts, ideas and modus-operandi, I should post through Google Groups so
>>they won't see my rabble rousing? <eg>
>
> That's the ticket!

**** that.

your pal,
blake

[blake murphy[_2_]]

On Wed, 20 Jan 2010 14:59:24 -0800, Dan Abel wrote:

> In article
> >,
> ImStillMags > wrote:
>
>>>
>>> > -Mags
>>>
>>> Sorry to chime in so late. *I've been busy. *Welcome. *:-)
>
>> Thanks Jean, I think I'm understanding the lay of the land here ;-)
>
> Don't get too complacent. I believe the Cabal (TINC) is going to change
> everything early on Monday.
>
> :-)

pfft. we'll just see about that - the rebel forces are poised to massively
hack the cabal's (TINC) computers as we speak.

your pal,
(name withheld by request)

[blake murphy[_2_]]

On Wed, 20 Jan 2010 15:03:39 -0800, Dan Abel wrote:

> In article >,
> blake murphy > wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 10:42:29 -0800, sf wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 12:56:10 -0500, blake murphy
>>> > wrote:
>
>>>>in any case, people could edit better (including taking care with
>>>>attributions), but it's not a major source of irritation for me.
>>>
>>> It's a major problem for me. Obviously they have no idea who said
>>> what. If that's the case, then just cut out everything except what
>>> you're responding to.
>>
>> well, all i can say is that you're swimming against the tide, here.
>
> I'm glad you understood what was being posted. I sure didn't. It
> almost sounded like sf was saying that people should trim their posts so
> that their replies make sense.
>
> "Sense" sounds like a good thing to me.

i was referring to her advocacy of top-posting.

your pal,
blake

[blake murphy[_2_]]

On Thu, 21 Jan 2010 07:02:55 -0600, Michel Boucher wrote:

> sf > wrote in news:3uifl5lu4tc96p945c9hhvofj2hdobbb5g@
> 4ax.com:
>
>> I love Windows. I knelt down and kissed Bills feet when I
>> didn't have to use DOS and Word Perfect.
>
> You take that back. DOS 5.0 was the perfect operating system.

DOS is boss!

your pal,
blake

[Michel Boucher[_3_]]

Stu > wrote in news:ck0hl5pce5ppqpcruvfrc3pfpuikccdk9h@
4ax.com:

> I remember standing outside of an Office Depot one morning with my two
> brother in laws waiting for them to open for the big sale, 540 meg.WD
> HD's were $328.67. what a steal, I can almost rebuild my cpu box for
> that now.

You can buy an Acer mini tower with Windows 7 loaded for about that much.

--

I have nothing against God.
It's his fan club I can't stand.

spotted on a poster

[Michel Boucher[_3_]]

blake murphy > wrote in
news
>> That one is discounted to a mere US$150.00 this week only. Please send
>> either a postal money order or an international money order. No checks
>> please.
>
> shee-it, i got my recipe from wal-mart for $25.

I got mine back in the day when the original ****ed off client was selling
them for only 19,95$US. A bargoon at the price. I have been able to sell
it over and over again, building up a wealth of such magnitude that it
dwarf even Nill Gates' piddling penny collection. And throughout, I have
remained magnanimous as always ;-)

--

I have nothing against God.
It's his fan club I can't stand.

spotted on a poster

[Michel Boucher[_3_]]

Michel Boucher > wrote in
:

> dwarf even Nill Gates' piddling penny collection

dwarfs even Bill Gates' piddling penny collection

--

I have nothing against God.
It's his fan club I can't stand.

spotted on a poster

[dsi1[_9_]]

On 1/20/2010 6:48 AM, heyjoe wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 17:27:28 -0800, sf wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 18:28:58 -0600, >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> for some insight into why
>>> you're not reaching as many folks in rec.food.cooking as you could
>>
>> Which isn't necessarily a bad thing either. I'd call it a reverse
>> kill file, a gift from Google.
>
> Ahh, so whenever the old stuck-in-the-mud RFC'ers are hassling me about new
> thoughts, ideas and modus-operandi, I should post through Google Groups so
> they won't see my rabble rousing?<eg>
>

Yes, this is the best way to filter those ultra-right wing guys out - or
is it ultra-left wing? Damn, I can never remember! I find the interface
too cumbersome but the appeal of being able to freely top post is
undeniable! :-)

[Dan Abel]

In article >,
Krypsis > wrote:

> DOS 5.0 was a "Disk Operating System", not an "Operating System" as that

No, it's an operating system, one based on disks rather than the
previous standard, which was magnetic tapes. When I got my first job
programming, we had a disk based OS, but all the commands were backward
compatible to tapes. After you got done looking at a file, the file
pointer was at the end. If you tried to look at the file again, there
was nothing left to see. There were a lot of panic attacks. "My file
is gone!". No, it was just fine. You needed to issue a REWIND command
to move the file pointer back to the beginning. This made a lot of
sense for tape files, since you often stored multiple files on a tape,
and sometimes you wanted to access them sequentially. It takes
comparatively long to rewind a tape file, so it wasn't done
automatically.

> would assume control over a bit more than disk drives and various bits
> of hardware. There wasn't even a hint of security in DOS (input any
> version), a feature vital in a multiuser/multitasking environment.

The computer used physical security. You locked it in a room, and no
one could access it. That's all you needed. And there was no multiuser
or multitasking. There was no network connection. At best, there was a
dialup modem, which was never left connected. You *always* disconnected
when not using it. And if you forgot, generally you got disconnected
automatically after a short time of no traffic (10 minutes for my ISP
from home).

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

[Michel Boucher[_3_]]

Dan Abel > wrote in news:dabel-E762C4.11313321012010@c-61-
68-245-199.per.connect.net.au:

> Krypsis > wrote:
>
>> There wasn't even a hint of security in DOS (input any
>> version), a feature vital in a multiuser/multitasking environment.
>
> The computer used physical security. You locked it in a room, and no
> one could access it.

I used all versions of DOS (except 1.0), connected by modem to BBSs and
then to the Internet willy-nilly (and still do) and was infected only once,
by our own IT person when she installed a required piece of software on my
computer at work. My security was running Windows 3.1 in 32-bit. It
detected that mofo virus (STONED) immediately. No need to buy Fnorton.

Never got infected at home.

--

I have nothing against God.
It's his fan club I can't stand.

spotted on a poster

[Krypsis]

Dan Abel wrote:
> In article >,
> Krypsis > wrote:
>
>> DOS 5.0 was a "Disk Operating System", not an "Operating System" as that
>
> No, it's an operating system, one based on disks rather than the
> previous standard, which was magnetic tapes. When I got my first job
> programming, we had a disk based OS, but all the commands were backward
> compatible to tapes. After you got done looking at a file, the file
> pointer was at the end. If you tried to look at the file again, there
> was nothing left to see. There were a lot of panic attacks. "My file
> is gone!". No, it was just fine. You needed to issue a REWIND command
> to move the file pointer back to the beginning. This made a lot of
> sense for tape files, since you often stored multiple files on a tape,
> and sometimes you wanted to access them sequentially. It takes
> comparatively long to rewind a tape file, so it wasn't done
> automatically.
>
>> would assume control over a bit more than disk drives and various bits
>> of hardware. There wasn't even a hint of security in DOS (input any
>> version), a feature vital in a multiuser/multitasking environment.
>
> The computer used physical security. You locked it in a room, and no
> one could access it. That's all you needed. And there was no multiuser
> or multitasking. There was no network connection. At best, there was a
> dialup modem, which was never left connected. You *always* disconnected
> when not using it. And if you forgot, generally you got disconnected
> automatically after a short time of no traffic (10 minutes for my ISP
> from home).
>
Our CDOS systems had NO security, CDOS being a derivative of CP/M. Our
Cromix systems, on the other hand, were full on security (for the era)
as well as being multiuser and multitasking. Since Cromix was based on
Unix System V, these attributes were a logical flow-on. Because we used
sensitive data in my department, this security was essential. As for
dial-up, we had permanent lines to our branch offices in three locations
around the urban area and they were never deliberately disconnected.
Hash on the lines would frequently cause disconnections but the systems
in the branch offices would detect this and automatically redial and
reconnect.
The only physical security we used was that the servers were initially
in an annexe off my office. People had to get past me to physically
access the servers. Normal means of access was via serial terminal or
dial-up. I cannot recall if the servers were physically connected to
each other by a network cable or whatever. I know the later ones were
using thick ethernet but that was when the computers became a serious
thing and they were moved off into their own server room. I seem to
recall a DEC PDP11 in the building back then but it was in a large area
of its own.

Krypsis

[sf[_9_]]

On Thu, 21 Jan 2010 14:24:51 -0600, Michel Boucher
> wrote:

>I used all versions of DOS (except 1.0), connected by modem to BBSs and
>then to the Internet willy-nilly (and still do) and was infected only once,
>by our own IT person when she installed a required piece of software on my
>computer at work. My security was running Windows 3.1 in 32-bit. It
>detected that mofo virus (STONED) immediately. No need to buy Fnorton.
>
>Never got infected at home.

Ha! I think literally everyone must have gotten that virus. Hubby's
computer got it from an infected floppy. It was a funny virus too...
literally made the screen look like you were looking at it stoned.

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

[sf[_9_]]

On Thu, 21 Jan 2010 12:52:34 -0500, blake murphy
> wrote:

>On Wed, 20 Jan 2010 15:03:39 -0800, Dan Abel wrote:
>
>> In article >,
>> blake murphy > wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 10:42:29 -0800, sf wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 12:56:10 -0500, blake murphy
>>>> > wrote:
>>
>>>>>in any case, people could edit better (including taking care with
>>>>>attributions), but it's not a major source of irritation for me.
>>>>
>>>> It's a major problem for me. Obviously they have no idea who said
>>>> what. If that's the case, then just cut out everything except what
>>>> you're responding to.
>>>
>>> well, all i can say is that you're swimming against the tide, here.
>>
>> I'm glad you understood what was being posted. I sure didn't. It
>> almost sounded like sf was saying that people should trim their posts so
>> that their replies make sense.
>>
>> "Sense" sounds like a good thing to me.
>
>i was referring to her advocacy of top-posting.
>
You starting to sound like a status quo conservative.

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

[Miche[_2_]]

In article >,
brooklyn1 > wrote:

> On Thu, 21 Jan 2010 06:33:35 +1300, Miche > wrote:
>
> >In article >,
> > "Ophelia" > wrote:
> >
> >> "George Shirley" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> > Ophelia wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> "ChattyCathy" > wrote in message
> >> >> ...
> >> >>> Christine Dabney wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>>> On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 01:50:46 -0800, sf > wrote:
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>> And I don't remember Miche as
> >> >>>>> an old timer or even close to one. She only became apparent in the
> >> >>>>> "miche" persona a *very* few years ago to me.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Both Miche and Tammy were posting before I got here. And I joined
> >> >>>> mid
> >> >>>> year in 1994. And both Miche and Tammy will/can confirm that they
> >> >>>> joined in 1994...and they have done so in the past. I remember them
> >> >>>> vividly..as I do several other illustrious posters.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I made my first post to this group in May 2005... IIRC, it had
> >> >>> something
> >> >>> to do with cooking lamb. Does that score me any (orgasmic) brownie
> >> >>> points? Just curious.
> >> >>
> >> >> *Gasp* *Shock* *Horror* you mean you are not willie waving?????
> >> >>
> >> >> heh me neither)
> >> >>
> >> > I would be terribly shocked if either of you was waving your own willie.
> >> > Don't forget I used to work with a lot of Brits, I seem to remember all
> >> > that vulgar slang they used. <G>
> >
> >One of my first posts here was asking what a bundt pan was (I didn't
> >know -- it's not really a terminology used here), and I was answered by
> >BKeith Ryder.
> >
> >Miche
>
> And moi, who explained how the Bundt pan is trademarked by
> Nordicware. You were certainly here way back then... where have you
> been?
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundt_cake

Reading but not posting some of the time, depending on what my life was
doing.

Posting more these days, finding the time somehow.

Miche

--
Electricians do it in three phases

[Lou decruss]

On Wed, 20 Jan 2010 20:23:37 -0600, "Gregory Morrow"
> wrote:

>Lou Decruss wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 21:11:42 -0600, "Gregory Morrow"
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> Remember, Bob, when some wag "spilled the beans" on PeterBreath's
>>> food "pictures" - that they were actually lifted from _Australian
>>> Woman_ magazine...!!!???
>>>
>>> Lol...
>>
>> Is that the mag Abby Winters shoots for?
>
>
>I dunno...

I was kidding about the "Australian woman" part. Abby is an
Australian photographer who shoots mostly butt-ugly models.

Lou

[sf[_9_]]

On Fri, 22 Jan 2010 23:01:30 +1300, Miche > wrote:

>Reading but not posting some of the time, depending on what my life was
>doing.

Listen here, Missy - if you have time to read, you have time to post!
>
>Posting more these days, finding the time somehow.

See above.


--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

[Lou decruss]

On Fri, 22 Jan 2010 10:35:05 -0800, Ranee at Arabian Knits
> wrote:

>In article >,
> sf > wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 22 Jan 2010 23:01:30 +1300, Miche > wrote:
>>
>> >Reading but not posting some of the time, depending on what my life was
>> >doing.
>>
>> Listen here, Missy - if you have time to read, you have time to post!
>
> I know you're teasing, but that isn't true. You have to be able to
>come defend yourself against people who think you are an idiot to roast
>peppers in the oven instead of over a gas flame, etc. It's hard to just
>make a comment and then not answer any questions or replies or whatever,
>and that takes time that people often don't have.

I don't post either if I know I won't have time to reply. Especially
if I have a query. I think it's rude to not be around to thank those
who've helped.

Lou